Exchange Sony A7R IV with GFX 50S?

Started 2 months ago | Questions thread
MattPointZero
MattPointZero Senior Member • Posts: 1,098
Re: That's not what DPReview concluded...

Velocity of Sound wrote:

If you read their "best landscape camera " showdown, the A7RIV is their top pick. The GFX 50S is listed in addition for consideration (listed third, behind the Canon EOS 5DS R, although I don't know that they ordered the list by strength of recommendation). The GFX 100 isn't listed. However, they had this to say:

If you look solely at the camera body, it's hard to justify the GFX 50S over its high-res full-frame peers because, while light, fast and capable by medium format standards, the image quality isn't significantly better than the smaller, lighter, faster and often cheaper rivals. However, the GF lenses make it easier to get full benefit from its 50MP, meaning it regularly delivers to its full capability.

I guess there's some discrepancy there with another series of articles that they wrote some months back, in which they concluded that larger sensors are superior. The conclusion is also a bit wishy-washy: they say image quality isn't significantly better, but that GF lenses regularly deliver "full capability." If that implies that Sony lenses aren't getting the full capability then it would seem to state that image quality is better.

I've never shot a Sony MILC, so I don't really know based on direct experience.

Indeed - and it was exactly this kind of review that got me excited by the a7Riv, especially as someone who has really liked the previous iterations.

My user experience was very different.

I should caveat that I imagine for landscapes it is very good.  I am primarily a portrait shooter.

I will try and dig out some image file examples for you that illustrate what I was seeing.  I found the A7Riii to be 'better' in terms of IQ at anything other than base ISO - there is no doubt that at base ISO in good light, the iv produces some very detailed images, and I guess we would expect nothing less.  However I found the eye AF and low light AF to be wildly inconsistent, with a very high rate of focus misses where I would have expected the Riii to have been fairly reliable - also as soon as you go over about 320 ISO I was finding the images notably noisy - again, I guess to be expected in the high MP tradeoff, but the overall drop in 'look' of the image and loss of detail as the ISO went up even a little completely undermined the point of the camera for me.  And even when you had the thing at base ISO in good light, the images from the GFX50S are clearly superior and more detailed.  **ANOTHER CAVEAT** I shoot the GFX with the 45 and 110 primes, the sony I was shooting with the 24-70, albeit the GM lens which has always been close to prime quality on my previous cameras.

I imagine for landscape and architecture shooters the experience may be different, and as always even if you are a portrait shooter your experience may be different to mine - there were also reports of AF issues on some cameras, maybe mine was not a good example - either way it went straight back to the supplier and made me hug my GFX a little closer.  AFAICT there is absolutely no comparison.

 MattPointZero's gear list:MattPointZero's gear list
Leica Q2 Fujifilm GFX 50S Fujifilm GF 110mm F2 Fujifilm GF 45mm F2.8
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow